Bills doing homework on 2017 QBs

[blacklabel]

Just wanted to chat about the 2017 QB class and how it pertains to the Bills.

 

As of now, news has been reported that the Bills have met with:

-Mitch Trubisky, UNC

-Nate Peterman, Pittsburgh

-Patrick Mahomes, Texas A&M

-DeShone Kizer, Notre Dame

-Chad Kelly, Ole Miss

 

Those are the "official" visits we know about. They flew out to NC last night to work out Trubisky, they've had/are having Peterman up here at OBD for one of their official draft visits. News also broke recently that they sat and had dinner with Kizer and they've met/talked with Kelly during Senior Bowl week. On top of that, reports leaked of Whaley being "in love" with Deshaun Watson. There were also reports a while back stating that Trubisky was the top QB on Whaley's board.

 

Now, clearly it's wise for them to do their homework on these QBs but to what extent are they interested in any of them?

 

As the draft approaches the consensus on the QBs seems to be coming into full focus and that focus says none of these players are Day One starters. All of them have their flaws, but all of them have positive traits as well.

 

In my mind, I don't believe they're seriously considering one in the first round. I think they're trying to create interest in the #10 pick. If they do trade down and collect extra picks then I'd say it's possible they take a QB in the first. I do wonder if they feel a little salty after last year. They were prepared to take Prescott with their fourth-round pick but of course Dallas beat them to it. I hope this doesn't force them into picking a guy too soon.

 

All of these QBs are a fit in the new offensive scheme which requires some mobility from the QB in order to make some plays outside the pocket. The best pure arm strength belongs to Kelly and Mahomes. The most accurate passer is Trubisky, that's if you exclude his deep ball which needs work. Kizer is said to have absolutely blown away coaches with his FBI and whiteboard work during the combine. Watson has that "it" factor in terms of leadership and showing up on big stages. Peterman has a head start over these guys as they enter the league considering he ran a pro style offense at Pitt.

 

This class is not as bad as some have suggested. It's also not the best, but it's not 2013. I do believe one or two of these guys can be high-level starters in the league.

 

It's clear that the Bills are most definitely trying to win this season with this current group. However, they've said while they're ready for the short-term they are also planning for the long-term. I believe they'd like to add a guy at the QB position to take over for Taylor in 2018 if Taylor doesn't show the improvements they're looking for. And if Taylor does show those improvements then they have a favorable situation on their hands. They could continue to roll with Taylor while having a guy waiting in the wings, trade Taylor and start the new kid, or trade the new kid, so there's options.

 

Of the guys that have visited/been linked to the Bills, which one would you like to see here and when? I think if they wanna take one in the first round it has to come after a trade down. And even if they do trade down and DON'T take a QB, they'll have a chance at one of these guys in the second round.

 

Based on what I've read and the games I've watched, I'm in on Watson. I know he has some flaws, but to me he has some incredible intangible qualities that you can't teach. He's extremely calm under pressure, big moments don't rattle him, his leadership is off the charts and teammates wanna go to war with this guy at the helm. My plan B would be Kizer in the second round, and for a lot of the same reasons I gave for Watson. Kizer also has a very high FBI, he's experienced, he did some good things with a not very talented offense around him and again, his leadership qualities are top notch.

 

We can, (and have, and will) go on and on about why the Bills or any team SHOULDN'T draft any of these guys. But I'm asking, which guy would you draft and why? Never mind the flaws for the moment. Focus on the pros this player can bring to the table and discuss which guy, which round and what qualities of his would make you want to see him get handed a Bills jersey on draft weekend.

[CommonCents]

I heard a lot of teams were planning on taking Brady in the 7th round! That's such crap, get the guy or don't, don't make excuses. If the QB you want is out there go get em or forever remain in purgatory.

[LeGOATski]

There will probably be more QBs linked to the Bills.

 

I don't like any of those prospects before the 3rd, but I would consider trading up for Mahomes in the bottom of the 2nd.

I heard a lot of teams were planning on taking Brady in the 7th round! That's such crap, get the guy or don't, don't make excuses. If the QB you want is out there go get em or forever remain in purgatory.

I don't agree. Trust your evaluation.

[wppete]

I think it will be a late round QB. We just signed Yates as the #2 and Cardale needs another redshirt year to develop.

[Logic]

Firstly: I would really love to know how everyone has reached the consensus that the Bills were "set to take Dak in the 4th round" last year. Yes, they visited with him and were reported to like him. Whaley is historically a height/weight/speed guy, though, and I get the feeing that the Bills were gonna select Cardale Jones regardless of whether Prescott was there or not. Can anyone point out to me what gives them the belief that Dak would have been the guy over Jones in round 4? Is there ANY objective truth to this, or is it just a case of wishful thinking that has somehow become Bills fan fact?

Secondly: This is too much due diligence to be just a smokescreen. When your coach, GM, and especially your OWNER are looking at every top quarterback available in a coming draft -- in a year in which the only legitimate QB on your roster is on a cheap two year deal and the coach has stated he wants to address the QB position "for the short term AND the long term" -- you'd better believe that QB at 10 is an option. If they think one of these guys is a franchise quarterback, they likely won't risk trading down and missing out on him, ESPECIALLY with Cleveland sitting there at 12.

Personally, I've come around on the idea of a QB in round one. The Bills can draft all the cornerbacks, receivers, and linebackers they want, but until they have a franchise quarterback, they'll never go further than the Wild Card round...and even THAT hasn't been achievable in the past 17 seasons! There will be plenty of good defensive players and even receivers in rounds 2-7. If they think one of these QBs is the real deal, they ought to pull the trigger THIS season. Forget perpetually saying "NEXT year is the year for good QBs!". It's nonsense. And never forget that new coaches often want to pick their OWN quarterbacks. In McDermott's mind, he likely doesn't envision picking top 10 too often. This is as good an opportunity as the Bills are likely to get to draft a top signal caller.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Logic

[KellyToughII]

I heard a lot of teams were planning on taking Brady in the 7th round! That's such crap, get the guy or don't, don't make excuses. If the QB you want is out there go get em or forever remain in purgatory.

Your post matches your name. I don't care what "experts" or the fake media has to say, if McD and Dennison want X QB in the first round, take him at 10 and don't look back.

Firstly: I would really love to know how everyone has reached the consensus that the Bills were "set to take Dak in the 4th round" last year. Yes, they visited with him and were reported to like him. Whaley is historically a height/weight/speed guy, though, and I get the feeing that the Bills were gonna select Cardale Jones regardless of whether Prescott was there or not. Can anyone point out to me what gives them the belief that Dak would have been the guy over Jones in round 4? Is there ANY objective truth to this, or is it just a case of wishful thinking that has somehow become Bills fan fact?

 

Secondly: This is too much due diligence to be just a smokescreen. When your coach, GM, and especially your OWNER are looking at every top quarterback available in a coming draft -- in a year in which the only legitimate QB on your roster is on a cheap two year deal and the coach has stated he wants to address the QB position "for the short term AND the long term" -- you'd better believe that QB at 10 is an option. If they think one of these guys is a franchise quarterback, they likely won't risk trading down and missing out on him, ESPECIALLY with Cleveland sitting there at 12.

Very Logical assessment my friend. Again Tyrod fans and those who listen to "experts" about this not being a good QB class are whistling through the graveyard. They better be prepared to see a QB taken at #10.

[KDIGGZ]

SMOKE SCREEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[LeGOATski]

Firstly: I would really love to know how everyone has reached the consensus that the Bills were "set to take Dak in the 4th round" last year. Yes, they visited with him and were reported to like him. Whaley is historically a height/weight/speed guy, though, and I get the feeing that the Bills were gonna select Cardale Jones regardless of whether Prescott was there or not. Can anyone point out to me what gives them the belief that Dak would have been the guy over Jones in round 4? Is there ANY objective truth to this, or is it just a case of wishful thinking that has somehow become Bills fan fact?

 

Secondly: This is too much due diligence to be just a smokescreen. When your coach, GM, and especially your OWNER are looking at every top quarterback available in a coming draft -- in a year in which the only legitimate QB on your roster is on a cheap two year deal and the coach has stated he wants to address the QB position "for the short term AND the long term" -- you'd better believe that QB at 10 is an option. If they think one of these guys is a franchise quarterback, they likely won't risk trading down and missing out on him, ESPECIALLY with Cleveland sitting there at 12.

 

Personally, I've come around on the idea of a QB in round one. The Bills can draft all the cornerbacks, receivers, and linebackers they want, but until they have a franchise quarterback, they'll never go further than the Wild Card round...and even THAT hasn't been achievable in the past 17 seasons! There will be plenty of good defensive players and even receivers in rounds 2-7. If they think one of these QBs is the real deal, they ought to pull the trigger THIS season. Forget perpetually saying "NEXT year is the year for good QBs!". It's nonsense.

Whoever it is, they're getting a project. Why would they pick a project at 10? That's not been their m.o.

 

I think it's safe to assume that they kept Tyrod and got Yates in order to afford themselves time for developing Cardale and a draft pick.

 

With that said, I think they're doing their due diligence, so that they're adequately familiar with and confident on the analysis of whoever falls to the 2nd or 3rd.

[Logic]

Whoever it is, they're getting a project. Why would they pick a project at 10? That's not been their m.o.

 

I think it's safe to assume that they kept Tyrod and got Yates in order to afford themselves time for developing Cardale and a draft pick.

 

With that said, I think they're doing their due diligence, so that they're adequately familiar with and confident on the analysis of whoever falls to the 2nd or 3rd.

Just remember that new head coaches often want to hand pick their own quarterback.

 

You could say "well, he picked Tyrod!", except that the contract restructuring and "out" after 2 years suggest that he isn't committing to Tyrod long term. McDermott also specifically said they want to address the QB position "both for the short term AND the long term", which was a pretty conspicuous use of language, especially when combined with the aforementioned contract restructuring.

 

And like I said above, I bet McDermott figures he won't be drafting top 10 very often, and that's where you need to be picking to have a shot at a franchise QB. Let's face it: MOST rookie QBs are "projects". Yes, some are good right away, but not most. And of those that are, they are usually drafted in the top 5.

 

If I was to guess, I'd say the Bills have deemed that they are currently in perfect position to draft a QB early. It's the first year of a new head coach's tenure, they have a decent stopgap QB in place on a team friendly two year deal, and they're drafting top 10. They're not likely to be this well positioned again in the near future, unless they regress significantly and have an even higher pick next year, which I don't see happening. If they think one of these guys is the real deal, they should draft him. If he has to sit for a year or two, so what...Tyrod can hold down the fort until he's ready.

 

One more thing: Whaley wants out of the "QB purgatory" he's mentioned. Again, when better to take a swing at that?

Edited April 10, 2017 by Logic

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

I think it will be a late round QB. We just signed Yates as the #2 and Cardale needs another redshirt year to develop.

....not sure what you mean by "late"......would like to see OBD trade down into the 20's, shoot for an extra 1st in 2018 and land a 2nd or 3rd in 2017 as well....as the draft goes, use a 2nd on a QB depending who is there, go into camp with four ala TT, Yates, draft pick and Cardale.....one gets cut, one to the PS and two to the active roster.....at least you have two 1sts in 2018 to shop for your "big prize" IF the class does allegedly turn out to be superior and if my 2017 outline did not work.......

Edited April 10, 2017 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[jeffismagic]

I would take Mahomes or Trubisky at #10. Mahomes has top 3 QB potential, could be special. Trubisky looks like a potential franchise guy as well, ideal fit is a Shanahan WCO.

 

Would not take Kizer or Watson.

 

 

Later in the draft I would target Josh Dobbs and Chad Kelly.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5NHC4QH6-8

Edited April 10, 2017 by jeffismagic

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

Your post matches your name. I don't care what "experts" or the fake media has to say, if McD and Dennison want X QB in the first round, take him at 10 and don't look back.

Very Logical assessment my friend. Again Tyrod fans and those who listen to "experts" about this not being a good QB class are whistling through the graveyard. They better be prepared to see a QB taken at #10.

 

 

 

 

don't see them taking a QB round 1...

[LeGOATski]

Just remember that new head coaches often want to hand pick their own quarterback.

 

You could say "well, he picked Tyrod!", except that the contract restructuring and "out" after 2 years suggest that he isn't committing to Tyrod long term. McDermott also specifically said they want to address the QB position "both for the short term AND the long term", which was a pretty conspicuous use of language, especially when combined with the aforementioned contract restructuring.

 

And like I said above, I bet McDermott figures he won't be drafting top 10 very often, and that's where you need to be picking to have a shot at a franchise QB. Let's face it: MOST rookie QBs are "projects". Yes, some are good right away, but not most. And of those that are, they are usually drafted in the top 5.

 

If I was to guess, I'd say the Bills have deemed that they are currently in perfect position to draft a QB early. It's the first year of a new head coach's tenure, they have a decent stopgap QB in place on a team friendly two year deal, and they're drafting top 10. They're not likely to be this well positioned again in the near future, unless they regress significantly and have an even higher pick next year, which I don't see happening. If they think one of these guys is the real deal, they should draft him. If he has to sit for a year or two, so what...Tyrod can hold down the fort until he's ready.

 

One more thing: Whaley wants out of the "QB purgatory" he's mentioned. Again, when better to take a swing at that?

This all makes sense if there was a QB in the draft who was actually valued as a top 10 pick.

 

Just because they play QB, doesn't mean you have to make them your first pick. It's a weird concept being touted in this forum right now. "If he's your guy, just pick him right away!" This concept lacks any consideration of value.

 

Trust your evaluations and pick a QB when the time is right. Doing this will result in a good prospect to develop behind Tyrod for the next year or two (alongside Cardale).

 

Then that QB will have an even better team around him when he's ready, because you used your first this year on a talented player worthy of that 10th pick.

Edited April 10, 2017 by LeGOATski

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...not much QB Homework has been done since the Kelly era, IF any.....so maybe this is a GOOD sign........

[Logic]

This all makes sense if there was a QB in the draft who was actually valued as a top 10 pick.

 

Just because they play QB, doesn't mean you have to make them your first pick. It's a weird concept being touted in this forum right now. "If he's your guy, just pick him right away!" This concept lacks any consideration of value.

 

Trust your evaluations and pick a QB when the time is right. Doing this will result in a good prospect to develop behind Tyrod for the next year or two (alongside Cardale).

 

Then that QB will have an even better team around him when he's ready, because you used your first this year on a talented player worthy of that 10th pick.

The only thing about assigning proper draft value to players is that teams often seem to do so incorrectly.

 

Case in point: The Bills are said to have had a 4th round grade on Russell Wilson. They stood pat and what happened? Seattle placed a higher value on him and took him before the Bills could. Likewise, how are all 32 teams' valuing of Dak Prescott as a 4th rounder looking right about now?

 

To be clear, I'm not saying you should overdraft a guy or place a 1st round grade on a guy that you think doesn't deserve it. What I AM saying, though, is that the whole IDEA of deciding "what round player X 'should' be drafted in" is an objective and imperfect exercise. I am also saying that with the quarterback position, if you have a strong conviction that a guy can be a Franchise Quarterback and can lead you to a championship, how early is too early? If the goal is "let's just take a QB in the middle rounds and see how he turns out in a couple years", then fine. That's what you're doing. But if the goal is "let's identify and draft a guy that we think can lead us to a Super Bowl victory", then how early is "too early"?

 

People often talk about draft value as if it's an absolute. In reality, draft value -- as determined by the 32 teams in the NFL -- is proven to be incorrect CONSTANTLY. Late round guys wind up being "first round caliber", and guys taken in the first round wind up busting. You still do your best to assign value, of course, but when it comes to the QB position in particular, I'm okay with "overdrafting" a guy if you think he can make you a perennial contender...bearing in mind that draft valuation is an objective and flawed process anyway.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Logic

[Punching Bag]

Secondly: This is too much due diligence to be just a smokescreen. When your coach, GM, and especially your OWNER are looking at every top quarterback available in a coming draft -- in a year in which the only legitimate QB on your roster is on a cheap two year deal and the coach has stated he wants to address the QB position "for the short term AND the long term" -- you'd better believe that QB at 10 is an option. If they think one of these guys is a franchise quarterback, they likely won't risk trading down and missing out on him, ESPECIALLY with Cleveland sitting there at 12.

 

I think by short term they mean a QB who can take over if TT is injured this season.

I think by long term they mean a QB who has high potential and looks like will fit plan long term if TT does not work out.

 

I do not know what their opinion is on Cardale Jones and whether he is a good prospect after reviewing what notes / film they have on him from last year and if they find 2 QBs they like (not both drafted likely) Jones could be cut, Same with Yates, doubt there was enough a signing bonus to have Bills hesitate in cutting him.

[Guest NeckBeard]

While to my eyes, I am not sold on Mahomes, and I while would much prefer a player like Watson, having written that I would not personally be offended by drafting Mahomes -- if Watson is not available. I would be really bummed about the other players on the OP's list, and yes, I have included fellow SJCI alumnus Chad Kelly.

 

I am not anti-DW by any stretch, but this time the QB is on him (and no, please don't say that this is an EJ thread -- my goodness, I am so relieved that he is gone). I could easily see the FO going a few more years with a player like Watson, but Mahomes is a wild card, and it is pure gut reaction that Mahomes can be coached up, but if not, the team will reboot the GM position, and pick a new QB a couple of years from now in that case.

Edited April 10, 2017 by NeckBeard

[Shaw66]

I don't know the draft. I don't know the QBs.

 

I think what the Bills are doing is what they say they always do, and what I believe ALL teams do: They evaluate ALL the players who may be of interest so that they can put together their board. They rank players in order and, generally, they take the highest player who is left on their board.

 

Now, if they have a QB at 10 and he's there, will they take him? I doubt it, but I don't know. But if they have a QB at 14 and he's sitting there when their turn comes up in the second round, they're taking him.

 

So I think that's why they're looking at all these guys. They need to know what they think about each of these guys, because an opportunity may arise to steal someone. Like it or not, that's why they traded up for Ragland - they thought he had a much higher draft rank than where he had fallen, and they traded up not to miss out on him.

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

I don't know the draft. I don't know the QBs.

 

I think what the Bills are doing is what they say they always do, and what I believe ALL teams do: They evaluate ALL the players who may be of interest so that they can put together their board. They rank players in order and, generally, they take the highest player who is left on their board.

 

Now, if they have a QB at 10 and he's there, will they take him? I doubt it, but I don't know. But if they have a QB at 14 and he's sitting there when their turn comes up in the second round, they're taking him.

 

So I think that's why they're looking at all these guys. They need to know what they think about each of these guys, because an opportunity may arise to steal someone. Like it or not, that's why they traded up for Ragland - they thought he had a much higher draft rank than where he had fallen, and they traded up not to miss out on him.

 

 

good to see you Shaw66

[Logic]

I don't know the draft. I don't know the QBs.

 

I think what the Bills are doing is what they say they always do, and what I believe ALL teams do: They evaluate ALL the players who may be of interest so that they can put together their board. They rank players in order and, generally, they take the highest player who is left on their board.

 

Now, if they have a QB at 10 and he's there, will they take him? I doubt it, but I don't know. But if they have a QB at 14 and he's sitting there when their turn comes up in the second round, they're taking him.

 

So I think that's why they're looking at all these guys. They need to know what they think about each of these guys, because an opportunity may arise to steal someone. Like it or not, that's why they traded up for Ragland - they thought he had a much higher draft rank than where he had fallen, and they traded up not to miss out on him.

Was just wondering if you had found your way over to this forum. Glad to see that you have.

[Reed83HOF]

I would take Mahomes or Trubisky at #10. Mahomes has top 3 QB potential, could be special. Trubisky looks like a potential franchise guy as well, ideal fit is a Shanahan WCO.

 

Would not take Kizer or Watson.

 

 

Later in the draft I would target Josh Dobbs and Chad Kelly.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5NHC4QH6-8

 

Well said!

[YoloinOhio]

They've been linked to five of the top QBs. So, if a team behind them thinks they might take their guy, they could potentially trade down and depending on who is still there, still get their QB. It's pretty much exactly what they did in 2013, and despite the 1st rounder not working out, the strategy did. They ended up with their QB and a starting WR and starting MLB in the 2nd. And another pick I can't recall - Gragg maybe. The idea in theory is good imo. Especially if they would be happy with more than one of the QBs.

Edited April 10, 2017 by YoloinOhio

[Bill_with_it]

I don't know the draft. I don't know the QBs.

 

I think what the Bills are doing is what they say they always do, and what I believe ALL teams do: They evaluate ALL the players who may be of interest so that they can put together their board. They rank players in order and, generally, they take the highest player who is left on their board.

 

Now, if they have a QB at 10 and he's there, will they take him? I doubt it, but I don't know. But if they have a QB at 14 and he's sitting there when their turn comes up in the second round, they're taking him.

 

So I think that's why they're looking at all these guys. They need to know what they think about each of these guys, because an opportunity may arise to steal someone. Like it or not, that's why they traded up for Ragland - they thought he had a much higher draft rank than where he had fallen, and they traded up not to miss out on him.

Some rational thoughts rather than quick takes and hot takes. I agree with you 100. It also creates as you can see from the responses in this thread that the perception is they might take one at ten, so it might be an attempt to force a trade of picks in addition to the reasons and rational you stated.

[LeGOATski]

The only thing about assigning proper draft value to players is that teams often seem to do so incorrectly.

 

Case in point: The Bills are said to have had a 4th round grade on Russell Wilson. They stood pat and what happened? Seattle placed a higher value on him and took him before the Bills could. Likewise, how are all 32 teams' valuing of Dak Prescott as a 4th rounder looking right about now?

 

To be clear, I'm not saying you should overdraft a guy or place a 1st round grade on a guy that you think doesn't deserve it. What I AM saying, though, is that the whole IDEA of deciding "what round player X 'should' be drafted in" is an objective and imperfect exercise. I am also saying that with the quarterback position, if you have a strong conviction that a guy can be a Franchise Quarterback and can lead you to a championship, how early is too early? If the goal is "let's just take a QB in the middle rounds and see how he turns out in a couple years", then fine. That's what you're doing. But if the goal is "let's identify and draft a guy that we think can lead us to a Super Bowl victory", then how early is "too early"?

 

People often talk about draft value as if it's an absolute. In reality, draft value -- as determined by the 32 teams in the NFL -- is proven to be incorrect CONSTANTLY. Late round guys wind up being "first round caliber", and guys taken in the first round wind up busting. You still do your best to assign value, of course, but when it comes to the QB position in particular, I'm okay with "overdrafting" a guy if you think he can make you a perennial contender...bearing in mind that draft valuation is an objective and flawed process anyway.

As if saying "this guy will make us a perennial contender" is so easy. You can only say that about a perfect prospect who's projected to go number 1, and even then, you could fail.

 

The flip side to what you're saying about missing on a "Russel Wilson" (and something that seems to happen even more often) is drafting a "Blaine Gabbert" at number 10.

 

This is why you simply trust your evaluation. That's your job and you spent the last year+ putting it together. Don't overdraft Trubisky, Mahomes, etc. They're not worth it. Wait until the value matches the player. That's also how teams end up with those their franchise guy. Oakland waited until the 2nd for Carr. Seahawks waited on Wilson until the 3rd, even though their OC was from Wisconsin and super-confident in him.

Edited April 10, 2017 by LeGOATski

[KollegeStudnet]

Still think Bills are selling the 10 for trade down/ extra picks. 6 picks, new coach, he need players.

They've been linked to five of the top QBs. So, if a team behind them thinks they might take their guy, they could potentially trade down and depending on who is still there, still get their QB. It's pretty much exactly what they did in 2013, and despite the 1st rounder not working out, the strategy did. They ended up with their QB and a starting WR and starting MLB in the 2nd. And another pick I can't recall - Gragg maybe. The idea in theory is good imo. Especially if they would be happy with more than one of the QBs.

 

True. Think they trade back and do the same as they did in 2013.

[The Jokeman]

With the current CBA it's foolish to take a QB in the top 10 picks if he isn't a franchise QB. As if you do then you have to give him a top 10 at his position contract in his 5th year if exercise his option. By contrast if taken outside the top 10 (in first round) if you take the option than you only give him a contract of average of QBs paid 3rd through 23rd aka most likely a much lower cap figure.

Edited April 11, 2017 by The Jokeman

[RyanC883]

smokscreen for trade-down partners? While at the same time looking at QB's like Peterson (and likely Dobbs at some point) who will be available later on.

[Mark Vader]

I don't know the draft. I don't know the QBs.

 

I think what the Bills are doing is what they say they always do, and what I believe ALL teams do: They evaluate ALL the players who may be of interest so that they can put together their board. They rank players in order and, generally, they take the highest player who is left on their board.

 

Now, if they have a QB at 10 and he's there, will they take him? I doubt it, but I don't know. But if they have a QB at 14 and he's sitting there when their turn comes up in the second round, they're taking him.

 

So I think that's why they're looking at all these guys. They need to know what they think about each of these guys, because an opportunity may arise to steal someone. Like it or not, that's why they traded up for Ragland - they thought he had a much higher draft rank than where he had fallen, and they traded up not to miss out on him.

I agree with your assessment. The Bills are evaluating as many players at a specific position, which is what they should do.

 

It's no secret that I am no fan of this year's QB class, yet I would not be shocked if the Bills drafted a QB. I just don't want them taking on Day 1 or Day 2.

 

They've been linked to five of the top QBs. So, if a team behind them thinks they might take their guy, they could potentially trade down and depending on who is still there, still get their QB. It's pretty much exactly what they did in 2013, and despite the 1st rounder not working out, the strategy did. They ended up with their QB and a starting WR and starting MLB in the 2nd. And another pick I can't recall - Gragg maybe. The idea in theory is good imo. Especially if they would be happy with more than one of the QBs.

If the Bills were to trade down and gain more picks, then I could stomach drafting a QB with a higher pick. I wasn't all that thrilled with the drafting of E.J., but the extra picks made it more bearable.

 

The Bills need more picks, due to the quality depth at certain positions in this years draft.

[LeGOATski]

With the current CBA it's foolish to take a QB in the top 10 picks if he isn't a franchise QB. As if you do then you have to give him a top 10 at his position contract in his 5th year if exercise his option. By contrast if taken outside the top 10 you only give him a contract of average of QBs paid 3rd through 23rd or a lower cap figure.

That's a good point.

[Thrivefourfive]

Sadly, the Buffalo Bills are fooling no team into jumping up in the draft to pick one of the quarterbacks. Only Bills fans believe that's a possibility. The real talk around the shield is more like...hey, if the Bills want them, we don't.

[Kemp2Warlick]

Adam Schefter‏Verified account @AdamSchefter 6m6 minutes ago

More

Ron Jaworski on @SportsCenter on the top-rated QBs in this draft: "I wouldn't take any of these guys in the first round."

[17 Josh Allen]

There's only one QB I would consider drafting with the 10th pick in this draft and that's Patrick Mahomes. I consider him to be the best player in this draft and a future Pro Bowler and Franchise winning Super Bowl QB. To me he is a special player and if the Bills get him there QB problems will be solved for the next 12 years.

[PromoTheRobot]

Please keep in mind QBs always seem to rise in every draft. Without fail guys who were considered middling prospects get elevated to near god-like status by late April. That's a function of agents, media and the offseason. Prospects are who they are. They don't magically improve between January and April.

Edited April 11, 2017 by PromoTheRobot

[Bray Wyatt]

With the current CBA it's foolish to take a QB in the top 10 picks if he isn't a franchise QB. As if you do then you have to give him a top 10 at his position contract in his 5th year if exercise his option. By contrast if taken outside the top 10 you only give him a contract of average of QBs paid 3rd through 23rd or a lower cap figure.

 

 

This is an interesting fact that I did not know so thanks for sharing.

That said, you would know by the time you need to exercise his option if he was a franchise QB so I do not think that really plays into consideration all that much as if he isn't you just wouldn't exercise it, and if he is you get a pretty good deal imo

[thebandit27]

With the current CBA it's foolish to take a QB in the top 10 picks if he isn't a franchise QB. As if you do then you have to give him a top 10 at his position contract in his 5th year if exercise his option. By contrast if taken outside the top 10 you only give him a contract of average of QBs paid 3rd through 23rd or a lower cap figure.

 

Except that the risk-reward is astronomically high if you get it right.

 

If a guy proves himself a franchise QB, even by year 3, then you have him on a ridiculously cheap deal in years 3 and 4, and on a market-level deal in year 5.

[Mr. WEO]

I would take Mahomes or Trubisky at #10. Mahomes has top 3 QB potential, could be special. Trubisky looks like a potential franchise guy as well, ideal fit is a Shanahan WCO.

 

Would not take Kizer or Watson.

 

 

Later in the draft I would target Josh Dobbs and Chad Kelly.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5NHC4QH6-8

 

Top 3....where?

[JMF2006]

I heard a lot of teams were planning on taking Brady in the 7th round! That's such crap, get the guy or don't, don't make excuses. If the QB you want is out there go get em or forever remain in purgatory.

 

Coulda,shouda,didn't.

BTW I think they draft Peterman in the 3rd after going safety /corner or corner/safety in rnds 1-2

[Dorkington]

They've been linked to five of the top QBs. So, if a team behind them thinks they might take their guy, they could potentially trade down and depending on who is still there, still get their QB. It's pretty much exactly what they did in 2013, and despite the 1st rounder not working out, the strategy did. They ended up with their QB and a starting WR and starting MLB in the 2nd. And another pick I can't recall - Gragg maybe. The idea in theory is good imo. Especially if they would be happy with more than one of the QBs.

I for one hope we trade down, we need some more picks to shore up depth in many key positions.

[jeffismagic]

 

Top 3....where?

 

One of the best 3 QB's in the NFL. I talked again to my friend that is a scout and he told me he thinks Mahomes will be better than Derek Carr.

 

It's good to see the lights are on at One Bills Drive and they are looking at QB's. Let's hope they take the right one.

[starrymessenger]

Adam Schefter‏Verified account @AdamSchefter 6m6 minutes ago

 

 

More

 

 

 

 

Ron Jaworski on @SportsCenter on the top-rated QBs in this draft: "I wouldn't take any of these guys in the first round."

 

Well that may be what he would (or would not) do, but I would not be surprised if three QBs come off the board in the first round and maybe 4 by the high second. If I'm right about the interest its not unlikely that one goes top 10 either.